From: Martin Knoblauch <spamtrap@knobisoft.de>
To: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>
Cc: a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: iozone write 50% regression in kernel 2.6.24-rc1
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 04:58:42 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <413167.31385.qm@web32610.mail.mud.yahoo.com> (raw)
----- Original Message ----
> From: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>
> To: Martin Knoblauch <knobi@knobisoft.de>
> Cc: a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl; LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 1:45:57 AM
> Subject: Re: iozone write 50% regression in kernel 2.6.24-rc1
>
> On Fri, 2007-11-09 at 04:36 -0800, Martin Knoblauch wrote:
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > > From: "Zhang, Yanmin"
> > > To: a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl
> > > Cc: LKML
> > > Sent: Friday, November 9, 2007 10:47:52 AM
> > > Subject: iozone write 50% regression in kernel 2.6.24-rc1
> > >
> > > Comparing with 2.6.23, iozone sequential write/rewrite (512M) has
> > > 50%
> > >
> > regression
> > > in kernel 2.6.24-rc1. 2.6.24-rc2 has the same regression.
> > >
> > > My machine has 8 processor cores and 8GB memory.
> > >
> > > By bisect, I located patch
> >
> >
>
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h
> =
> > > 04fbfdc14e5f48463820d6b9807daa5e9c92c51f.
> > >
> > >
> > > Another behavior: with kernel 2.6.23, if I run iozone for many
> > > times
> > >
> > after rebooting machine,
> > > the result looks stable. But with 2.6.24-rc1, the first run of
> > > iozone
> > >
> > got a very small result and
> > > following run has 4Xorig_result.
> > >
> > > What I reported is the regression of 2nd/3rd run, because first run
> > > has
> > >
> > bigger regression.
> > >
> > > I also tried to change
> > > /proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio,dirty_backgroud_ratio
> > >
> > and didn't get improvement.
> > could you tell us the exact iozone command you are using?
> iozone -i 0 -r 4k -s 512m
>
OK, I definitely do not see the reported effect. On a HP Proliant with a RAID5 on CCISS I get:
2.6.19.2: 654-738 MB/sec write, 1126-1154 MB/sec rewrite
2.6.24-rc2: 772-820 MB/sec write, 1495-1539 MB/sec rewrite
The first run is always slowest, all subsequent runs are faster and the same speed.
>
> > I would like to repeat it on my setup, because I definitely see
> the
>
opposite behaviour in 2.6.24-rc1/rc2. The speed there is much
> better
>
than in 2.6.22 and before (I skipped 2.6.23, because I was waiting
> for
>
the per-bdi changes). I definitely do not see the difference between
> 1st
>
and subsequent runs. But then, I do my tests with 5GB file sizes like:
> >
> > iozone3_283/src/current/iozone -t 5 -F /scratch/X1
> /scratch/X2
>
/scratch/X3 /scratch/X4 /scratch/X5 -s 5000M -r 1024 -c -e -i 0 -i 1
> My machine uses SATA (AHCI) disk.
>
4x72GB SCSI disks building a RAID5 on a CCISS controller with battery backed write cache. Systems are 2 CPUs (64-bit) with 8 GB memory. I could test on some IBM boxes (2x dual core, 8 GB) with RAID5 on "aacraid", but I need some time to free up one of the boxes.
Cheers
Martin
next reply other threads:[~2007-11-12 12:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-11-12 12:58 Martin Knoblauch [this message]
2007-11-13 2:04 ` iozone write 50% regression in kernel 2.6.24-rc1 Zhang, Yanmin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-11-09 12:36 Martin Knoblauch
2007-11-12 0:45 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2007-11-09 9:47 Zhang, Yanmin
2007-11-09 9:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-11-12 2:14 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2007-11-12 9:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-11-12 9:51 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2007-11-12 13:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
[not found] ` <47386BC4.3050403@panasas.com>
2007-11-12 16:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-11-13 2:19 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2007-11-13 8:34 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2007-11-13 18:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-11-12 17:25 ` Mark Lord
2007-11-13 1:49 ` Zhang, Yanmin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=413167.31385.qm@web32610.mail.mud.yahoo.com \
--to=spamtrap@knobisoft.de \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox